The runway issue is general and not relieved in the arctic. See e.g.- Your ministry of defence recommends 10 000 ft runway for F-35A in training, otherwise 8000 ft.

That specific 10,000ft requirement is primarily related to noise abatement. A longer take-off at lesser thrust reduces the noise footprint which is important for trainig operations IVO semi urban bases.

YIMBY wrote:

Even though rules can be relaxed at war (which we use to disagree) F-35A still remains far from 800 m that most of its contenders reach, unless they have found some tricks to improve it. Canada has few airfields that satisfy the runway requirement, particularly the far north stations.

Of course, Canada and Australia are not that dependant to be able to use their fighters from any road strip than front line Europe where all major airports may be destroyed within day one.

The 800m for any of the fighter aircraft in service today is not with a max payload. The F-35A has demonstrated the ability to take off from 800m of less and the F-35B clearly has the ability to use a less than 800m strip. Any 800m takeoff distance for all fighter aircraft is dependent upon a number of factors including payload (fuel and weapons) and atmospheric conditions.

It really depends on how many jets they acquire and even down to which ones they acquire. The RAAF classic Hornet fleet has some examples with more flight hours than most and the fleet has raked up quite a bit of operational time since 2014. The question is which ones will the RAAF provide to the Canadians and it must be remembered the RAAF aren't retiring the bulk of their fleet until early 2022. You then need to consider how many hours a year the Canadians want to fly and whether they retire any Canadian Hornets due to high hour numbers and replace these with RAAF jets.

Lockheed Martin’s F-35 appears to be the real winner in the fallout from Boeing’s rift with Canada over Bombardier’s C Series passenger jetliner. Canada’s liberal government has reportedly decided to scrap its planned $5.2 billion purchase of new F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets as an interim solution to replacing its aging fleet of older-model Hornets. Instead, the Royal Canadian Air Force would buy earlier-generation Hornets from Australia as a short-term measure. The ...

The gun is NOT a precious symbol of freedomIt is a deadly cancer on American societyThose who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideologyThat is impervious to evidence

It really depends on how many jets they acquire and even down to which ones they acquire. The RAAF classic Hornet fleet has some examples with more flight hours than most and the fleet has raked up quite a bit of operational time since 2014. The question is which ones will the RAAF provide to the Canadians and it must be remembered the RAAF aren't retiring the bulk of their fleet until early 2022. You then need to consider how many hours a year the Canadians want to fly and whether they retire any Canadian Hornets due to high hour numbers and replace these with RAAF jets.

Low time parts from RAAF Hornets coupled with a few mashed parts from RCAF Hornets such as the Avionics, etc. And don't forget the signature creepy spotlight. Add in a little speed tape, Beemans gum and you have a first rate "Frankenfleet" ready for the 2020s.

Low time parts from RAAF Hornets coupled with a few mashed parts from RCAF Hornets such as the Avionics, etc. And don't forget the signature creepy spotlight. Add in a little speed tape, Beemans gum and you have a first rate "Frankenfleet" ready for the 2020s.

They are deluded into thinking the Super Hornet is in the running for the CF-18 replacement by playing up the multi engine aspect of the interim solution.

Boeing is correct, Canada should be buying multi-engined fighters........like the Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon.

Highly likely they (Trudeau government) will eventually have to admit Harper's Conservatives made the right choice and stick with the F-35 - but will wait after the 2019 election to make the announcement.

Highly likely they (Trudeau government) will eventually have to admit Harper's Conservatives made the right choice and stick with the F-35 - but will wait after the 2019 election to make the announcement.

I have no doubt a competition will be run, that would be too much of a backflip to not happen, but there should be little doubt that the F-35 will be the best option on both cost and capability.

Highly likely they (Trudeau government) will eventually have to admit Harper's Conservatives made the right choice and stick with the F-35 - but will wait after the 2019 election to make the announcement.

That is exactly what they are doing.

CBC wrote:

Multiple government and industry sources say what the public will see is the first step "in a long road" toward the issuing of a formal tender in early 2019 and the eventual acquisition of brand new warplanes by the mid-2020s.

By the time the tender is over, the Liberals will have won the election and can admit the F-35 is NOW the best aircraft for the job because it isnt in development anymore, or the Conservatives will be back in power and they order the F-35.

Boeing is correct, Canada should be buying multi-engined fighters........like the Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon.

Typhoon would make a lot more sense than the F-35 for Canada given the core mission of Canadian/North American air defense. Harper was a hardcore neocon so of course he would want a dedicated strike aircraft (F-35) as opposed to something more adept at air to air/ air defense (Typhoon)

Through this competition, the Government of Canada will ensure it gets the right aircraft at the right price, and maximizes economic benefits for Canadians. The government will ensure that the Canadian aerospace and defence industries and manufacturers are consulted and engaged in this process.

Proposals will be rigorously assessed on cost, technical requirements and industrial, technological and economic benefits. As it is important to do business with trusted partners, the evaluation of bids will also include an assessment of bidders’ impact on Canada’s economic interests.

When bids are assessed, any bidder responsible for harm to Canada’s economic interests will be at a distinct disadvantage. This new assessment, as well as guidelines for its application as an ongoing procurement tool, will be developed through appropriate consultations.

Information there points to 18 RAAF Hornets being acquired, the first time I have seen a number and is lower than I expected. Those jets won’t be available until 2022, right at contract signature for the new fighter and only three years before the first jet is expected to enter service, while it will likely be a 3-5 year transfer from the classic Hornet to the new fighter. I didn’t think the Canadian Hornet fleet was so short on hours so it seems excessive to bring in 18 RAAF Hornets, likely with similar hours, to tide the fleet over. I haven’t seen any pricing on acquiring the RAAF Hornets yet, will be interesting to see what value is attached to them by Australia and Canada.

[I haven’t seen any pricing on acquiring the RAAF Hornets yet, will be interesting to see what value is attached to them by Australia and Canada.

CDN$500M has been put aside by the Feds. The actual amount will be determined later, pending further detailed negotiations (including amount of spare parts, which airframe is actually acquired)

The article also mentions the following: "Transfers to a third party of military equipment originally provided via foreign military sales require U.S. authorization"

Well, if the US rejects the transaction, that would be a good pretext for Canada to temporally suspend those useless NATO air defense deployments. That would save airframe stress/hours big time and extend our legacy Hornets life a few more years... (We can support NATO way more efficiently by providing more land troops in the Baltics...)

CDN$500M has been put aside by the Feds. The actual amount will be determined later, pending further detailed negotiations (including amount of spare parts, which airframe is actually acquired)

Thanks for that. If we said $10 mill per aircraft, then transport, spares, admin etc on top of that would give some leeway for the budget.

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

The article also mentions the following: "Transfers to a third party of military equipment originally provided via foreign military sales require U.S. authorization"

I don’t see that being an issue other than the paperwork to gain the approval. Plenty of ex US equipment moves around the globe, both Canada and Australia are trusted partners and Canada already operates the aircraft.

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

Well, if the US rejects the transaction, that would be a good pretext for Canada to temporally suspend those useless NATO air defense deployments. That would save airframe stress/hours big time and extend our legacy Hornets life a few more years... (We can support NATO way more efficiently by providing more land troops in the Baltics...)

A lot of the long term fleet analysis I have seen points to operational hours, as long as they aren’t excessive, being better for overall fleet management than homeland training. Typically less Gs and edge case airframe incidents operationally compared to what occurs at home. Where they do save is not having to deploy and support those units overseas.

Its my undestanding that our legacy Hornets are more hours limited while the Aussies ones not as much, but got more corrosion problems.

Hope L3 MAS in Mirabel find the optimal way to salvage the good parts somehow and can ensure an overall life extension of sufficient airframes.

Do you expect the RCAF to fly the ex-RAAF jets or just cannibalise them? I was expecting them to put them into service but given the timeframe, 2022, there won’t be a great deal of time to get L-3 to upgrade 18 jets before entering service.

I believe it could be any of both approaches. Each airframe will be assessed (it's probably being done now) and the optimal/cheapest approach will be retained for each frame.

Aussie Hornets don't have exactly the same avionics, equipment, radios and modifications. We would need to bring those a bit closer to "RCAF standards" if I can say (basically swapping the CF18 eqpt into the Aussie Hornet). There is a cost to that.

That's why it could be cheaper, by example, to just swap the wings for one particular frame. No other eqpt upgrade would then be needed. That particular Aussie Hornet become then a part donnor.

Each frame might be different.

The exact parts swapping / or eqpt upgrade plan will be drafted for each frame, before the contract is signed. (it will also dictate which frame is procured).

(Pls note that my career was in the army, not the Air Force. Some of the infos I got are from my L3 MAS buddies. I would be happy to be corrected if need be)

I believe it could be any of both approaches. Each airframe will be assessed (it's probably being done now) and the optimal/cheapest approach will be retained for each frame.

Aussie Hornets don't have exactly the same avionics, equipment, radios and modifications. We would need to bring those a bit closer to "RCAF standards" if I can say (basically swapping the CF18 eqpt into the Aussie Hornet). There is a cost to that.

That's why it could be cheaper, by example, to just swap the wings for one particular frame. No other eqpt upgrade would then be needed. That particular Aussie Hornet become then a part donnor.

Each frame might be different.

The exact parts swapping / or eqpt upgrade plan will be drafted for each frame, before the contract is signed. (it will also dictate which frame is procured).

(Pls note that my career was in the army, not the Air Force. Some of the infos I got are from my L3 MAS buddies. I would be happy to be corrected if need be)

It is great info, thanks.

I am pretty familiar with the RAAF Hornets and it will be interesting to see what they look to swap. I believe the RAAF Hornets are at a higher capability level than the RCAF jets and some of those systems have never been used by the RCAF so perhaps they will just remove them off and go from there.

Wild thought since Airbus is involved with Bombardier now, Canada buys some Eurofighters as an interim and joins Germany and France in their new fighter study.....if I recall correctly Canada was in the early stages also involved in the F104 replacement group which later led to the development of the Tornado.

It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong

Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon Marise Payne, today announced the Government has agreed to the sale of 18 Royal Australian Air Force F/A-18 A/B Classic Hornets to the Government of Canada.

The offer follows an expression of interest from the Canadian Government received in September. The sale of the aircraft and associated spares remains subject to final negotiations and Country of Origin export approvals.

Defence plans to withdraw its fleet of F/A-18A/B Classic Hornets from service by 2022, which will be progressively replaced by the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, Australia's new fifth-generation air combat capability.

Minister Payne spoke with her Canadian counterpart, Minister for National Defence Harjit Sajjan, to welcome the sale.

“Australia greatly values our longstanding and broad bilateral defence relationship with Canada, and this decision is another example of our close and strong partnership,” Minister Payne said.

“The aircraft will supplement Canada’s existing fleet as it develops and implements its plan to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force fighter jet fleet.

Transfer of the first two aircraft is expected to occur from the first half of 2019, in line with the current plan to transition to the Joint Strike Fighter.

Australia’s first two Joint Strike Fighters are expected to arrive in Australia at the end of 2018.

So the first two aircraft are scheduled to arrive in Canada in 2019 with the last transferred by 2022.

Wild thought since Airbus is involved with Bombardier now, Canada buys some Eurofighters as an interim and joins Germany and France in their new fighter study.....if I recall correctly Canada was in the early stages also involved in the F104 replacement group which later led to the development of the Tornado.

Won't happen at least in that way, the Canadian Government is now committed to an open and fair competition.

Eurofighter probably has every intention of bidding for that tender and perhaps they can offer work on the next Europeon fighter jet as an industrial offset... but I think it would be premature for Canada to take any offer on potential work. If Canada do select the Eurofighter they would have far more airframe available to not need fleet replacement, nor do they intend to operate a two fighter jet fleet, so the next European fighter doesn't really fit their timeline.